Remember me
▼ Content

Recent Mass Shootings (since 2016)



Page 2 of 2<12
07-08-2019 23:11
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(4328)
HarveyH55 wrote:If you want or need assault rifles, then you should feel 'punished', if you need to fill out a little more paper work, a few more steps in the ownership process, beyond what you need for a handgun.

Harvey, the issue is the abandonment of the Constitution and of American exceptionalism.

The United States was founded on the basis of liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, as a right, not as something for which one needed to request permission from the government. The founding fathers constructed the Constitution to stand in contrast to European governments that had nobility and whereby people were "allowed" to do things if it pleased the king or the government. The Constitution outlaws nobility and says that We the People are allowed to do anything and everything, unless by exception. If it isn't specifically prohibited by law then it is legal for We the People. In fact, the Constitution itself is one big restriction on what the government can do/prohibit.

So then we come to the issue of firearms and suddenly people like you want everything to be about getting permission from the government for every little thing, for filling out ever more piles of paperwork for the privilege of begging the government for permission. Frankly, you can take that perspective and shove it. I don't want my country turning into Venezuela just because people like you feel entitled to impose your will onto others and to pretend to claim what others need and don't need.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
08-08-2019 01:26
HarveyH55
★★★★☆
(1012)
IBdaMann wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:If you want or need assault rifles, then you should feel 'punished', if you need to fill out a little more paper work, a few more steps in the ownership process, beyond what you need for a handgun.

Harvey, the issue is the abandonment of the Constitution and of American exceptionalism.

The United States was founded on the basis of liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, as a right, not as something for which one needed to request permission from the government. The founding fathers constructed the Constitution to stand in contrast to European governments that had nobility and whereby people were "allowed" to do things if it pleased the king or the government. The Constitution outlaws nobility and says that We the People are allowed to do anything and everything, unless by exception. If it isn't specifically prohibited by law then it is legal for We the People. In fact, the Constitution itself is one big restriction on what the government can do/prohibit.

So then we come to the issue of firearms and suddenly people like you want everything to be about getting permission from the government for every little thing, for filling out ever more piles of paperwork for the privilege of begging the government for permission. Frankly, you can take that perspective and shove it. I don't want my country turning into Venezuela just because people like you feel entitled to impose your will onto others and to pretend to claim what others need and don't need.


Yeah, well things have changed a whole lot in the past 250 years or so. We, the people, no longer have the same morals, values, honesty, integrity, or common sense they had. Too many people don't respect the government, their neighbors, or even themselves all that much. There aren't the immediate, and public consequences for the bad acts of these individuals either, and it never reflects the degree of those bad acts either. Few executions, never done publicly, and a decade or two after the conviction. We've strayed from the way things were a lot. I don't remember the exact count, something like 26 or 27 amendments to the constitution. The Bill of Rights, came soon after the constitution. It's in the constitution, to keep it up to date. The Constitution was meant as the framework, and would be added to and refined over time.

One more time, do you need pictures? I'm only talking about one, just ONE, very specific type of weapon, designed specifically to kill a lot of people, quickly, no practice or training required. About as easy to get as BB gun. Killing should be that simple or easy. It needs some very special attention, to make sure they aren't used as toys, but a very serious killing tool.

Automobiles did move very fast at first, but as the years went by, they got a lot fast. Now, we have speed limits, mandatory to wear seat belts (primary offense in Florida), airbags are mandatory equipment, because seat belts aren't anywhere as effective as claimed. We still have accidents, and not so accidental deaths and injuries, just not as bad.

Treating assault rifles as a special case, as they are won't stop the senseless killing, but should slow it down a little, least reduce some of the carnage. I don't think it will ever stop, there is no perfect, single solution. There are going to need several approaches to the problem. It's not just about a few mentally ill individuals, there are hundreds of victims injured or killed, thousand who feel the senseless directly. But mostly, there are millions wondering everyday, if it's safe. It's that freedom, liberty? Every school shooting, effects all the students across the country, millions of them, and their parents, a considerable portion of the population. Every school has a few strange students, creepy staff members. Kids pick on other kids, they fight, it's part of growing up, most eventually work things, peacefully, friendly. Some don't go very well, and carry it throughout their lives.
08-08-2019 06:20
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8697)
HarveyH55 wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:If you want or need assault rifles, then you should feel 'punished', if you need to fill out a little more paper work, a few more steps in the ownership process, beyond what you need for a handgun.

Harvey, the issue is the abandonment of the Constitution and of American exceptionalism.

The United States was founded on the basis of liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, as a right, not as something for which one needed to request permission from the government. The founding fathers constructed the Constitution to stand in contrast to European governments that had nobility and whereby people were "allowed" to do things if it pleased the king or the government. The Constitution outlaws nobility and says that We the People are allowed to do anything and everything, unless by exception. If it isn't specifically prohibited by law then it is legal for We the People. In fact, the Constitution itself is one big restriction on what the government can do/prohibit.

So then we come to the issue of firearms and suddenly people like you want everything to be about getting permission from the government for every little thing, for filling out ever more piles of paperwork for the privilege of begging the government for permission. Frankly, you can take that perspective and shove it. I don't want my country turning into Venezuela just because people like you feel entitled to impose your will onto others and to pretend to claim what others need and don't need.


Yeah, well things have changed a whole lot in the past 250 years or so. We, the people, no longer have the same morals, values, honesty, integrity, or common sense they had.

They are better!
HarveyH55 wrote:
Too many people don't respect the government,

But they do. Only Democrats and liberals don't respect the government.
HarveyH55 wrote:
their neighbors,

You are not showing respect for your neighbors right now. Why should I be punished for what some clown in El Paso did? Why should your neighbor?
HarveyH55 wrote:
or even themselves all that much.

I don't know about you, but since you are advocating giving up your freedoms and liberty for security, I don't think you care much about yourself either. You will have neither.
HarveyH55 wrote:
There aren't the immediate, and public consequences for the bad acts of these individuals either, and it never reflects the degree of those bad acts either. Few executions, never done publicly, and a decade or two after the conviction.

So long as the criminals are off the street, what do you care?
HarveyH55 wrote:
We've strayed from the way things were a lot.

In many ways better, in some ways not.
HarveyH55 wrote:
I don't remember the exact count, something like 26 or 27 amendments to the constitution.

27.
HarveyH55 wrote:
The Bill of Rights, came soon after the constitution.

So?
HarveyH55 wrote:
It's in the constitution, to keep it up to date.

No. The Constitution does not expire. It is always up to date.
HarveyH55 wrote:
The Constitution was meant as the framework, and would be added to and refined over time.

No. It is the law. It declares and defines what the federal government is, what powers it has, (and in some cases specifically what it DOESN'T have), and it's structure.
HarveyH55 wrote:
One more time, do you need pictures? I'm only talking about one, just ONE, very specific type of weapon, designed specifically to kill a lot of people, quickly, no practice or training required.

The 2nd amendment does not describe any weapon by type, brand, or type of action.
HarveyH55 wrote:
About as easy to get as BB gun.

No. It's more expensive than a BB gun.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Killing should be that simple or easy. It needs some very special attention, to make sure they aren't used as toys, but a very serious killing tool.

You are responsible for every bullet fired from a gun you own. Good enough?
HarveyH55 wrote:
Automobiles did move very fast at first, but as the years went by, they got a lot fast.

Do you know how many people were killed by horse and buggies?
HarveyH55 wrote:
Now, we have speed limits,

You did then, too.
HarveyH55 wrote:
mandatory to wear seat belts (primary offense in Florida),

That a problem? A seat belt is the best protection you have, other than your own awareness.
HarveyH55 wrote:
airbags are mandatory equipment,

Can be useful, but only in very limited circumstances, and they are dangerous.
HarveyH55 wrote:
because seat belts aren't anywhere as effective as claimed.

They sure as hell are! Wear them! It doesn't matter whether they are mandatory or not! Wear them!
HarveyH55 wrote:
We still have accidents, and not so accidental deaths and injuries, just not as bad.

Several factors. Cars are built to crush and absorb the impact, sacrificing themselves to save the cabin (except Smart Cars!). Seat belts are better and generally more comfortable too. Use them. The roads have been vastly improved. Ends of barriers are buried so they don't skewer occupants of cars anymore. They are sturdier too. Break away light poles that don't cause your car to wrap around it killing everyone in the car. Better markings on pavement. Better built signs directing traffic flow (more reflective and simplified with icons instead of lots of letters). Medical response is faster and more effective than ever before if you need it.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Treating assault rifles as a special case,

The AR15 is not an assault rifle. It is a semiautomatic rifle, no different than any other semiautomatic rifle.
HarveyH55 wrote:
as they are won't stop the senseless killing,

Taking guns away does not stop senseless killing. Each of these killings take place in a 'gun free zone'. Turning the whole country into a 'gun free zone' make the matters worse, not better. Criminals don't give a damn about 'gun free zones'.
HarveyH55 wrote:
but should slow it down a little,

Not one iota. These last two shootings in Dayton and again in El Paso were the work of antifa having one of it's more violent days. BOTH shooters were liberals, racist, and wanted simply to kill.
HarveyH55 wrote:
least reduce some of the carnage.

Not one iota. See above.
HarveyH55 wrote:
I don't think it will ever stop, there is no perfect, single solution.

There are several things you can do:

* remove 'gun free zones'. That's where mass murderers go to carry out their destruction.
* get serious about stopping groups like antifa and other violent and criminal gangs.
* get serious about holding psychoquacks that prescribe mind altering drugs that develop homicidal and suicidal tendencies responsible for their quackery.
* get serious about getting the homeless into treatment.
* get serious about getting the mentally ill into treatment.
* encourage more people to carry. The fewer there are, the better it is for the mass murderer.
in schools:
* train some personnel in first aid, CPR, the use of an AED, and the use of a chest seal.
* run away if a shooter appears. For every foot you gain, the chance of you getting goes down by the inverse square law.
* if you can't run away, attack the shooter with intent to kill or disable. Lives are on the line.
* install steel doors on classrooms that instructors can lock from the inside without the use of a key. Only the office can override.
* install steel drop slats that can be dropped on command from the office. Isolating the shooter deprives him of his targets. They will usually shoot themselves. No mass shooting at any school has lasted longer than 10 minutes. The steel will stop most rounds, and may even cause a ricochet that will dispatch the stupid shooter for you.
* teach kids to run away or retreat to such classrooms if a shooter appears.
* allow teachers to carry. They already have this capability in most States.

If you think the teacher is a creep, why are you sending your kids to school?? Don't you think you should bring it up with the principal?

Above all, realize there is NO guarantee of safety anywhere. Having the means to end a problem earlier is far better than being unarmed and having no recourse. Also realize that there are FAR more good guys (and gals!) with guns the bad guys with guns.
HarveyH55 wrote:
There are going to need several approaches to the problem.

I've listed a few.
* steel doors on classrooms stop most any round, including .223 rounds, at least long enough for 10 minutes to pass (no incident has lasted longer than 10 minutes).
* steel drop slats isolate the shooter so he can't move from room to room picking targets.
* first aid training, including CPR, use of an AED, and use of a chest seal are simple and VERY effective ways to save lives. A lot of lives.
* shooters seek out 'gun free zones' so they have a chance to cause mayhem and become infamous. Deprive of them of that chance. Eliminate 'gun free zones'. You don't get mass murderers in shooting ranges for a reason.

* Do not depend on a false sense of security.
* Do not blame me for what somebody did in El Paso. I wasn't in El Paso. I am one of 120 million households that own 300 million guns that DIDN'T shoot up a single shopping mall or school, and have no plans to. If come across someone that does, I WILL fire back, even to save people like you that want to take my gun away.

I think it's time you get a sense of perspective and show a little gratitude for what people like me are willing to do for you. Don't attack that which helps to protect you from a mass murderer.

HarveyH55 wrote:
It's not just about a few mentally ill individuals,

Correct. It's about mentally ill left untreated, or treated with mind altering drugs prescribed by psychoquacks, or antifa being particularly violent (the last two shootings were antifa), or the KKK getting violent, or the violent gangs.
HarveyH55 wrote:
there are hundreds of victims injured or killed, thousand who feel the senseless directly.

Doing something effective about it is the answer. Banning guns is not effective. Criminals don't care about the law. You will not make a gun go away by banning it. All you do is punish those who are NOT shooting up shopping malls and schools. You punish me. I take exception to that.
HarveyH55 wrote:
But mostly, there are millions wondering everyday, if it's safe.

Yes. Despite the news media and some days when antifa is particularly brutal, these events are extremely rare. Out of all the thousands of schools and shopping malls in the nation, two had an incident. Do not live in news induced paranoia.
HarveyH55 wrote:
It's that freedom, liberty?

Oddly enough, yes.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Every school shooting, effects all the students across the country, millions of them, and their parents, a considerable portion of the population.

News induced paranoia. The numbers speak for themselves.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Every school has a few strange students, creepy staff members.

Sure. I remember them. My high school library was destroyed by a student. He loved fire. He stood and watched it burn when they came to haul him away.

I had a shooting at my school too, in college. Right there in the cafeteria. The shooter got ONE shot off before he was killed by a good guy with a gun. No other deaths. The girl he shot recovered.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Kids pick on other kids, they fight, it's part of growing up, most eventually work things, peacefully, friendly.

HA! I don't believe THAT for a second!


The Parrot Killer
09-08-2019 05:30
HarveyH55
★★★★☆
(1012)
I really don't enjoy debate games, makes difficult and time consuming to sort through the gaming BS. I won't modify my vocabulary as part of the game, I've no intention of play. There is no time limits, no game clock, why waste each other's with it? Most of the BS stall and delay tactics, to force me to use up my response time. I've got other things I'd rather do. I realize you have trouble turning it, you spent a long time refining your skills. Takes a lot of practice, to squeeze as much as you can in to a minute or two. It's become more of train reflects, can't help yourself.

You know exactly which type of weapon I'm discussing, repeated it many times, no sense wasting time on that.

No mention of banning anything, or punishing you, game or paranoia? You want to drive a car, you take a test, get you identity checked, probably criminal background. You get your car registered, requires insurance. Millions of cars on the road, still problems, but not that bad considering how many drivers there are, most of the bad ones are easy enough to weed out. Same could apply to ownership of exotic, semi automatic rifles, assault rifles. If you have nothing to hide, you shouldn't have any problem going through a more thorough process of getting these weapons, no license, no sale. Really depends on the determination and motive of the active shooter, resources available. The assault rifles, ammunition, spare magazines, even body armor, is readily available and way to easy for pretty much anyone to get. Can't stop them all, without a bullet, but you can make it difficult enough that many won't just stop off at Walmart, pick up what they need, at the spur of the moment. Most of them don't seem the type to hang out with the criminal part of society, they don't know which ones will sell them assault rifles, or which are cops, who would turn them in, rip them off, or shoot them. Another deterrent, risky going that route, risky doing it legal, less light to fulfill their demented dream, without getting caught, before they can start shooting.

It's too late for any bans anyway, too many already sold. You can't 'seize' them either, people would hide and hoard them, better than owning gold, unless you get caught.

Your ideas about all the steel doors and barriers for schools, are very practical, kind of expensive, specially for older schools. Maybe for new constructions, but it's tough to raise enough cash, to keep up with the needed classrooms as it is. There would also need to be a lot of safety features, manual overrides. You don't want to crush students, or trap them in a burning building.

Guns were never the best solution to any problem, just the simplest, final solution (in many cases). It's better to solve a problem, before the shooting ever gets started, and that's what I'm looking at. The Ohio shooter only had about 30 seconds of shooting, 9 dead, 27 wounded. The police used their hand guns, not assault rifles, they rarely use them. There aren't that many crimes, where a homeowner needs to defend against an army of thugs. In those few cases, that homeowner almost always had some legal issues of their own (drug dealer). It's just marketing, that everyone needs assault rifles to defend their homes. Seldom needed or used, which ever weapon you have handy, is generally good enough, even if it's not a firearm.

Assault rifles are a specialty, exotic, weapon, and should have been treated as such from the beginning. They should never have been cheap and easy to buy. Little late to figure that out, take a long time to clean up the mess.
10-08-2019 04:43
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8697)
HarveyH55 wrote:
I really don't enjoy debate games, makes difficult and time consuming to sort through the gaming BS. I won't modify my vocabulary as part of the game, I've no intention of play.

Then I will continue to correct you. You are using the wrong vocabulary to begin with.
HarveyH55 wrote:
There is no time limits, no game clock, why waste each other's with it? Most of the BS stall and delay tactics, to force me to use up my response time. I've got other things I'd rather do. I realize you have trouble turning it, you spent a long time refining your skills. Takes a lot of practice, to squeeze as much as you can in to a minute or two. It's become more of train reflects, can't help yourself.

You know exactly which type of weapon I'm discussing, repeated it many times, no sense wasting time on that.

The AR15 design. A semiautomatic rifle similar to a Winchester, Ruger, or other semiautomatic rifle, but with more accessories.
HarveyH55 wrote:
No mention of banning anything,

Lie. That's exactly what you are discussing!
HarveyH55 wrote:
or punishing you,

Lie. That's exactly what you are discussing!
HarveyH55 wrote:
game or paranoia?

No game. No paranoia. You want to punish ME for what some guy did in Ohio. You want to take MY gun away and make it so the government gets to decide who can have one. You want to overthrow the Constitution of the United States.

This is no game!

HarveyH55 wrote:
You want to drive a car, you take a test, get you identity checked, probably criminal background.

Why?
HarveyH55 wrote:
You get your car registered, requires insurance.

Why would it require insurance? You DO realize THAT law is unconstitutional as well, don't you?
HarveyH55 wrote:
Millions of cars on the road, still problems, but not that bad considering how many drivers there are, most of the bad ones are easy enough to weed out.

WRONG. I have to avoid bad drivers every day I drive.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Same could apply to ownership of exotic, semi automatic rifles, assault rifles.

Nothing exotic about them. They are not assault rifles. The AR15 is simply just another semiautomatic rifle.
HarveyH55 wrote:
If you have nothing to hide,

Attempted force of negative proof fallacy. I do NOT have to prove my innocence!
HarveyH55 wrote:
you shouldn't have any problem going through a more thorough process of getting these weapons, no license, no sale.

Attempted force of negative proof fallacy. I do NOT have to prove my innocence! The government does NOT have the authority to limit any weapon by type or action or brand.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Really depends on the determination and motive of the active shooter, resources available.

Irrelevant.
HarveyH55 wrote:
The assault rifles,

Not an assault rifle.
HarveyH55 wrote:
ammunition,

Commonly available ammunition.
HarveyH55 wrote:
spare magazines,

I always pack extra ones. I have four magazines for each of my pistols.
HarveyH55 wrote:
even body armor,

I don't bother. Neither do most mass murderers, come to think of it.
HarveyH55 wrote:
is readily available

If you have the cash, yes.
HarveyH55 wrote:
and way to easy for pretty much anyone to get.

Why not?
HarveyH55 wrote:
Can't stop them all, without a bullet, but you can make it difficult enough that many won't just stop off at Walmart, pick up what they need, at the spur of the moment.

Why do you want to punish ME for what someone else did in Ohio? Why make it hard on ME?
HarveyH55 wrote:
Most of them don't seem the type to hang out with the criminal part of society, they don't know which ones will sell them assault rifles, or which are cops, who would turn them in, rip them off, or shoot them. Another deterrent, risky going that route, risky doing it legal, less light to fulfill their demented dream, without getting caught, before they can start shooting.

Now you're stretching it.
HarveyH55 wrote:
It's too late for any bans anyway, too many already sold.

Here is your lie. Right here. Remember when you said you weren't talking about bans??
HarveyH55 wrote:
You can't 'seize' them either, people would hide and hoard them, better than owning gold, unless you get caught.

No, they'll just shoot the guy seizing them. That's called self defense, dude.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Your ideas about all the steel doors and barriers for schools, are very practical, kind of expensive, specially for older schools.

Not expensive at all. It isn't even affected by the age of the school. Just replace the door.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Maybe for new constructions,

Old or new. Just replace the door.
HarveyH55 wrote:
but it's tough to raise enough cash,
to keep up with the needed classrooms as it is.

You can thank the NEA for that one. It should be disbanded.
HarveyH55 wrote:
There would also need to be a lot of safety features, manual overrides. You don't want to crush students, or trap them in a burning building.

It doesn't. The teacher can lock the door, they can unlock the door. Simple.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Guns were never the best solution to any problem,

I have listed many uses for guns. They are the best solution for the use. That's why people use them.
HarveyH55 wrote:
just the simplest,

Nothing wrong with that!
HarveyH55 wrote:
final solution (in many cases).

BULL. Most gunshot wounds injure not kill. First aid is the best solution.
HarveyH55 wrote:
It's better to solve a problem, before the shooting ever gets started, and that's what I'm looking at.

If the shooting gets started, THEN there is a problem. The best solution is a good guy with a gun.
HarveyH55 wrote:
The Ohio shooter only had about 30 seconds of shooting, 9 dead, 27 wounded.

From a specially modified pistol, not an AR15. Antifa is getting bolder. Yes...the guy is Antifa. So was the El Paso shooter.
HarveyH55 wrote:
The police used their hand guns, not assault rifles, they rarely use them.

They actually have assault rifles, which is to say machine guns. They also have some really talented snipers. Depending on the situation, they may opt for a semiautomatic rifle or a bolt action rifle.
HarveyH55 wrote:
There aren't that many crimes, where a homeowner needs to defend against an army of thugs.

You want to send an army of thugs. You want to punish ME using government thugs for what some guy in Ohio did.
HarveyH55 wrote:
In those few cases, that homeowner almost always had some legal issues of their own (drug dealer).

I deal no drugs. I have not committed any crime. Yet it's ME you want to send government thugs after.
HarveyH55 wrote:
It's just marketing, that everyone needs assault rifles to defend their homes.

If you get your way, THAT is the reason right there. THAT is the reason to own an M16, or even an AR15 (not an assault rifle). The AR15 is also a good rifle to defend ranches and farms.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Seldom needed or used, which ever weapon you have handy, is generally good enough, even if it's not a firearm.

WRONG. I have the right to defend myself as best as I can. YOU do not get to choose the weapons I will use.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Assault rifles are a specialty, exotic, weapon,

Even if they were, it makes no difference.
HarveyH55 wrote:
and should have been treated as such from the beginning.

The government does not have the authority to treat ANY weapon differently.
HarveyH55 wrote:
They should never have been cheap and easy to buy.

They aren't cheap, but they are easy to buy.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Little late to figure that out, take a long time to clean up the mess.

Nothing to 'clean up'. YOU don't get to send government thugs to get my guns. YOU don't get to decide what gun I get to buy. YOU don't get to decide the purpose for my purchase of a gun.

The 2nd amendment is clear. The government is not authorized to mess with an individual's right to obtain any weapon of any sort. It does NOT have the authority to infringe on the right of self defense.


The Parrot Killer
10-08-2019 10:21
HarveyH55
★★★★☆
(1012)
A lot of one line, repetitive, regurgitation, which tend skip over anymore. It's you debate game, you play yourself.

The only way you are going to lose your weapons, is if your are flagged as mentally unstable, from a closer examination. Perhaps you know you just squeezed by, you only to check a 'no' box, for mental illness, on some form. Paranoia is a mental illness...

I don't get to tell anybody what they can and can not do. I don't work for the government. I'm not doing to you, nor do I have the capacity to do so. You're getting hysterical, panicked, and paranoid, irrational, over a simple discussion. I don't know where your debate game crap starts or ends, doing my best to sort through. Mostly, I'm kind of thinking it's all crap.

Active shooters like crowds of people... How does 10 or so other people, drawing weapons and firing, really help? Bullets to care who or what they hit. You hit your target, but only soft tissue, it can still pass through, and hit somebody else. When the shooting starts, it's chaos, people running, diving for cover. Those carry, aren't going know each other. How can you be sure they will be shooting the right person, and not just the first person holding a gun? Do you receive active shooter training, as part of getting a carry permit? Are there special signals you use, to let the other guardian citizen know you aren't the target? I'm a little skeptical about how effective people would be, who most shoot at paper, at a gun range would be. There are a lot of distractions, the target moves, and some chance people running for their lives, are bumping into you. But, in your case, who cares, they are only strangers, you don't know any of them. You could count the number of place you can take your assault rifle in public on one hand, that you don't need to keep it hidden, like your other dirty little secrets. Mostly, you get to keep in your house, to defend your home, from the armies of armed criminals that live in your neighborhood. You basically got to sneak it out of the house, to go to the gun range, or some secluded place out in the woods. Wouldn't be better to do something about your local crime problem, rather than relying on guns to live your life safely? You have no control over it, so you need something to make feel like you have power over it. It's sort of like your debate game, the way to win is power and control, and nothing else matters.
10-08-2019 22:35
HarveyH55
★★★★☆
(1012)
https://www.massshootingtracker.org/data/all

Apparently, mass shootings are a lot more common than we are lead to believe. Officially, 4 or more victims, is considered a mass shooting. Was looking for weapon type, by incident, but have found that yet. This list was quite surprising though, 2662 mass shootings, since 2014, just in America. Think this a fairly accurate list too, they link to the news article(s) where the got their information. I remember several of the domestic shootings, that I hadn't know at the time, were classified as mass shootings. With just the minimal 4 victims, that's over 10,000 victims in less than 5 years. While scrolling through, on had a note, the shooter had a conceal carry permit. Hope the closed that loop-hole in the current process. The vast majority seem to be domestic violence related. Maybe they should put a greater focus on that for a while. Could be good for those being abused, since the violent on, probably loves his guns above all else, might be a little better behaved.

I'm not sure what can be done with all those deemed mental unfit to own guns. It's sort of a subjective thing. Treatment only deals with symptoms, doesn't cure the cause. Drugs don't always work, sometimes create more problems than they treat. Never really know, until they prescribe something, basically guess at the appropriate dosage, adjust as needed, see how it works out. Of course, it depends on the patient, actual take the medication, as directed, and letting the doctor know if they aren't working, or causing other problems. Patients aren't doctors, and unlikely to know if there is a problem to discuss. The only actual 'cures' I'm aware of, were E.C.T, and Frontal Lobotomy. I don't think they do lobotomies anymore, since it general turned the patient into a drooling zombie, in need of lifetime care. E.C.T. is still used, but scares the crap out of me, but apparently effective. It's not simply getting your brain zapped once, flop and twitch for 30-40 minutes, and you're done. It's sort of like chemo-therapy, they make you go through it a bunch times. I really hate getting shocked, but I don't freak over it though, it's just creepy. I work with electricity quite a bit, prefer low voltage/current, but have to do the shocky stuff occasionally. Doubt I'll get shocked to death, but some safety practices will still let you feel it. Anyway, E.C.T. takes months, and it's kind of rough. Not like it's entirely outpatient, or DIY. It messes up your brain pretty good, takes a while to get rebooted, and back on track. They have know idea what is going to get messed, and how long it's going to take the patient to be ready to return to work.
11-08-2019 07:53
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8697)
HarveyH55 wrote:
A lot of one line, repetitive, regurgitation, which tend skip over anymore. It's you debate game, you play yourself.

Nah. You're just not willing to listen to the arguments I have made. You label them 'debate games' as a way to simply discard them. That's a fallacy, dude.
HarveyH55 wrote:
The only way you are going to lose your weapons, is if your are flagged as mentally unstable, from a closer examination. Perhaps you know you just squeezed by, you only to check a 'no' box, for mental illness, on some form. Paranoia is a mental illness...

Now you are justifying taking my guns away because of your psychoquackery.
HarveyH55 wrote:
I don't get to tell anybody what they can and can not do.

You are attempting to do just exactly that, liar.
HarveyH55 wrote:
I don't work for the government.

No, but you are perfectly willing to empower government thugs to do your dirty work for you.
HarveyH55 wrote:
I'm not doing to you, nor do I have the capacity to do so. You're getting hysterical, panicked, and paranoid, irrational, over a simple discussion. I don't know where your debate game crap starts or ends, doing my best to sort through. Mostly, I'm kind of thinking it's all crap.

You are doing it to me, by pushing laws that ban guns I may own or wish to purchase.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Active shooters like crowds of people... How does 10 or so other people, drawing weapons and firing, really help?

End of bad guy with gun.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Bullets to care who or what they hit. You hit your target, but only soft tissue, it can still pass through, and hit somebody else. When the shooting starts, it's chaos, people running, diving for cover. Those carry, aren't going know each other. How can you be sure they will be shooting the right person, and not just the first person holding a gun?

The situation is resolved. there is no more shooting. No more people need die.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Do you receive active shooter training, as part of getting a carry permit? Are there special signals you use, to let the other guardian citizen know you aren't the target? I'm a little skeptical about how effective people would be, who most shoot at paper, at a gun range would be. There are a lot of distractions, the target moves, and some chance people running for their lives, are bumping into you. But, in your case, who cares, they are only strangers, you don't know any of them. You could count the number of place you can take your assault rifle in public on one hand, that you don't need to keep it hidden, like your other dirty little secrets.

You are still trying to paint me as some crazed individual. I didn't shoot up Ohio or El Paso, jackass.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Mostly, you get to keep in your house, to defend your home, from the armies of armed criminals that live in your neighborhood. You basically got to sneak it out of the house, to go to the gun range, or some secluded place out in the woods. Wouldn't be better to do something about your local crime problem, rather than relying on guns to live your life safely? You have no control over it, so you need something to make feel like you have power over it. It's sort of like your debate game, the way to win is power and control, and nothing else matters.

YOU don't get to determine whether I can carry a gun or not. YOU don't get to determine what kind of gun I can carry or not.

The 2nd amendment is clear. The government has NO authority to infringe on any weapon in any way.


The Parrot Killer
11-08-2019 07:54
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8697)
HarveyH55 wrote:
https://www.massshootingtracker.org/data/all

Apparently, mass shootings are a lot more common than we are lead to believe. Officially, 4 or more victims, is considered a mass shooting. Was looking for weapon type, by incident, but have found that yet. This list was quite surprising though, 2662 mass shootings, since 2014, just in America. Think this a fairly accurate list too, they link to the news article(s) where the got their information. I remember several of the domestic shootings, that I hadn't know at the time, were classified as mass shootings. With just the minimal 4 victims, that's over 10,000 victims in less than 5 years. While scrolling through, on had a note, the shooter had a conceal carry permit. Hope the closed that loop-hole in the current process. The vast majority seem to be domestic violence related. Maybe they should put a greater focus on that for a while. Could be good for those being abused, since the violent on, probably loves his guns above all else, might be a little better behaved.

I'm not sure what can be done with all those deemed mental unfit to own guns. It's sort of a subjective thing. Treatment only deals with symptoms, doesn't cure the cause. Drugs don't always work, sometimes create more problems than they treat. Never really know, until they prescribe something, basically guess at the appropriate dosage, adjust as needed, see how it works out. Of course, it depends on the patient, actual take the medication, as directed, and letting the doctor know if they aren't working, or causing other problems. Patients aren't doctors, and unlikely to know if there is a problem to discuss. The only actual 'cures' I'm aware of, were E.C.T, and Frontal Lobotomy. I don't think they do lobotomies anymore, since it general turned the patient into a drooling zombie, in need of lifetime care. E.C.T. is still used, but scares the crap out of me, but apparently effective. It's not simply getting your brain zapped once, flop and twitch for 30-40 minutes, and you're done. It's sort of like chemo-therapy, they make you go through it a bunch times. I really hate getting shocked, but I don't freak over it though, it's just creepy. I work with electricity quite a bit, prefer low voltage/current, but have to do the shocky stuff occasionally. Doubt I'll get shocked to death, but some safety practices will still let you feel it. Anyway, E.C.T. takes months, and it's kind of rough. Not like it's entirely outpatient, or DIY. It messes up your brain pretty good, takes a while to get rebooted, and back on track. They have know idea what is going to get messed, and how long it's going to take the patient to be ready to return to work.

So you think moving the goalposts is a valid argument???


The Parrot Killer
11-08-2019 08:18
GasGuzzler
★★★★☆
(1326)
Into the Night wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
A lot of one line, repetitive, regurgitation, which tend skip over anymore. It's you debate game, you play yourself.

Nah. You're just not willing to listen to the arguments I have made. You label them 'debate games' as a way to simply discard them. That's a fallacy, dude.
HarveyH55 wrote:
The only way you are going to lose your weapons, is if your are flagged as mentally unstable, from a closer examination. Perhaps you know you just squeezed by, you only to check a 'no' box, for mental illness, on some form. Paranoia is a mental illness...

Now you are justifying taking my guns away because of your psychoquackery.
HarveyH55 wrote:
I don't get to tell anybody what they can and can not do.

You are attempting to do just exactly that, liar.
HarveyH55 wrote:
I don't work for the government.

No, but you are perfectly willing to empower government thugs to do your dirty work for you.
HarveyH55 wrote:
I'm not doing to you, nor do I have the capacity to do so. You're getting hysterical, panicked, and paranoid, irrational, over a simple discussion. I don't know where your debate game crap starts or ends, doing my best to sort through. Mostly, I'm kind of thinking it's all crap.

You are doing it to me, by pushing laws that ban guns I may own or wish to purchase.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Active shooters like crowds of people... How does 10 or so other people, drawing weapons and firing, really help?

End of bad guy with gun.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Bullets to care who or what they hit. You hit your target, but only soft tissue, it can still pass through, and hit somebody else. When the shooting starts, it's chaos, people running, diving for cover. Those carry, aren't going know each other. How can you be sure they will be shooting the right person, and not just the first person holding a gun?

The situation is resolved. there is no more shooting. No more people need die.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Do you receive active shooter training, as part of getting a carry permit? Are there special signals you use, to let the other guardian citizen know you aren't the target? I'm a little skeptical about how effective people would be, who most shoot at paper, at a gun range would be. There are a lot of distractions, the target moves, and some chance people running for their lives, are bumping into you. But, in your case, who cares, they are only strangers, you don't know any of them. You could count the number of place you can take your assault rifle in public on one hand, that you don't need to keep it hidden, like your other dirty little secrets.

You are still trying to paint me as some crazed individual. I didn't shoot up Ohio or El Paso, jackass.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Mostly, you get to keep in your house, to defend your home, from the armies of armed criminals that live in your neighborhood. You basically got to sneak it out of the house, to go to the gun range, or some secluded place out in the woods. Wouldn't be better to do something about your local crime problem, rather than relying on guns to live your life safely? You have no control over it, so you need something to make feel like you have power over it. It's sort of like your debate game, the way to win is power and control, and nothing else matters.

YOU don't get to determine whether I can carry a gun or not. YOU don't get to determine what kind of gun I can carry or not.

The 2nd amendment is clear. The government has NO authority to infringe on any weapon in any way.


Perfect answers ITN.

Harvey, I'm coming to your house tonight and I'm bringing 3 friends. We're all heavily armed and we we don't give 2 shits about you or anyone in your home. I will be there in 5 seconds...(hypothetical)

4 questions for you....

1. Do you want to be armed?
2. What kind of weapon do you want?
3. How many rounds do you want in each clip?
4. How fast would you like to be able to fire each round?


I think people screw me over because they don't want to see someone willing to put out the effort that they won't.~James~
11-08-2019 10:47
tmiddles
★★★☆☆
(666)
GasGuzzler wrote:
4 questions for you....

1. Do you want to be armed?
2. What kind of weapon do you want?
3. How many rounds do you want in each clip?
4. How fast would you like to be able to fire each round?


Keep in mind everything you decide will be legal will be in the hands of those attacking you. Criminals have almost exclusively guns that are legal to buy.

I'm giving you option 5. Call 911 and hide

People itching to stand their ground need therapy more than they need a gun.
11-08-2019 15:51
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(4328)
tmiddles wrote:I'm giving you option 5. Call 911 and hide

Nope. You EVADE the issue.

At any mass shooting, how many of the deaths were prevented by law enforcement?

tmiddles wrote:People itching to stand their ground need therapy more than they need a gun.

That's a typical un-American gun-craven quip:"I hate America, I hate law-abiding citizens and I want the streets controlled by armed gangs just like in Venezuela.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
11-08-2019 17:03
HarveyH55
★★★★☆
(1012)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
A lot of one line, repetitive, regurgitation, which tend skip over anymore. It's you debate game, you play yourself.

Nah. You're just not willing to listen to the arguments I have made. You label them 'debate games' as a way to simply discard them. That's a fallacy, dude.
HarveyH55 wrote:
The only way you are going to lose your weapons, is if your are flagged as mentally unstable, from a closer examination. Perhaps you know you just squeezed by, you only to check a 'no' box, for mental illness, on some form. Paranoia is a mental illness...

Now you are justifying taking my guns away because of your psychoquackery.
HarveyH55 wrote:
I don't get to tell anybody what they can and can not do.

You are attempting to do just exactly that, liar.
HarveyH55 wrote:
I don't work for the government.

No, but you are perfectly willing to empower government thugs to do your dirty work for you.
HarveyH55 wrote:
I'm not doing to you, nor do I have the capacity to do so. You're getting hysterical, panicked, and paranoid, irrational, over a simple discussion. I don't know where your debate game crap starts or ends, doing my best to sort through. Mostly, I'm kind of thinking it's all crap.

You are doing it to me, by pushing laws that ban guns I may own or wish to purchase.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Active shooters like crowds of people... How does 10 or so other people, drawing weapons and firing, really help?

End of bad guy with gun.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Bullets to care who or what they hit. You hit your target, but only soft tissue, it can still pass through, and hit somebody else. When the shooting starts, it's chaos, people running, diving for cover. Those carry, aren't going know each other. How can you be sure they will be shooting the right person, and not just the first person holding a gun?

The situation is resolved. there is no more shooting. No more people need die.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Do you receive active shooter training, as part of getting a carry permit? Are there special signals you use, to let the other guardian citizen know you aren't the target? I'm a little skeptical about how effective people would be, who most shoot at paper, at a gun range would be. There are a lot of distractions, the target moves, and some chance people running for their lives, are bumping into you. But, in your case, who cares, they are only strangers, you don't know any of them. You could count the number of place you can take your assault rifle in public on one hand, that you don't need to keep it hidden, like your other dirty little secrets.

You are still trying to paint me as some crazed individual. I didn't shoot up Ohio or El Paso, jackass.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Mostly, you get to keep in your house, to defend your home, from the armies of armed criminals that live in your neighborhood. You basically got to sneak it out of the house, to go to the gun range, or some secluded place out in the woods. Wouldn't be better to do something about your local crime problem, rather than relying on guns to live your life safely? You have no control over it, so you need something to make feel like you have power over it. It's sort of like your debate game, the way to win is power and control, and nothing else matters.

YOU don't get to determine whether I can carry a gun or not. YOU don't get to determine what kind of gun I can carry or not.

The 2nd amendment is clear. The government has NO authority to infringe on any weapon in any way.


Perfect answers ITN.

Harvey, I'm coming to your house tonight and I'm bringing 3 friends. We're all heavily armed and we we don't give 2 shits about you or anyone in your home. I will be there in 5 seconds...(hypothetical)

4 questions for you....

1. Do you want to be armed?
2. What kind of weapon do you want?
3. How many rounds do you want in each clip?
4. How fast would you like to be able to fire each round?


Your guns won't do you much good, unless you get in. Should I always open the door to armed strangers? Should I greet everyone who comes to the door, with a gun in my hand? I have video security, look, before I answer the door, and pretty good idea how I'll need to deal with it, before I get there. Forcing your way in will take a minute, and considerable noise. You'll likely need to shoot the dog first. I'm not sure why you you and your friends want to kill me, but you are likely to have few friends, regardless of my weapon of choice. I'd choice a shotgun, best chance of dealing with multiple targets, close range, indoors. Less lethal to me, if a stray bounces back at me. My exterior walls are solid concrete block. Interior just regular blocks. Not out of paranoia, but concrete block holds up to hurricanes well. House was built in 1946, decades before I was born. I'd have to guess, that if 4 people forced their way in, with an intent to kill, you would all have you weapons ready to rock. Even if I had the fastest, most powerful assault rifle sold at Walmart, I could still only fire at one at a time. You'd have to stand in a straight line, for me to get more than one.

Far as I know, nobody has any need or interest in killing me, unless that's what you and your friends, hypothetically do for fun. So, hypothetically, you are all mentally ill, and the poster children for gun control.

Assault rifles are just a little excessive for most actual situations you would need a gun for defense. If you are responsible, and actually need one, you shouldn't have a problem with a little more paperwork, a test or two. Those who just want to play with them, or just want them to kill a lot of people quick and easy, won't likely go through it. These are most definitely not toys. Access and owner ship should be limited to those committed to responsible ownership.

How come nobody is allowed full automatic weapons? Doesn't that violate the 2nd Amendment? I don't recall a lot of people pushing for fully automatic weapons. You want to spit out as much lead, as quickly as possible, fully automatic would be the ultimate weapon of choice. Since semi automatics are so common, and easy to get, wouldn't you want a superior weapon? We could also use hand grenades too, can't always expect to get line of sight, but maybe you could chuck or launch a grenade over in the general direction and get lucky. I don't want to be focused entirely on defense, I'd prefer to attack the problem, before it gets to a shooting situation in the first place. If you live in a crime infested rat hole, clean it up.
Apply the laws we already have on the books, follow them yourself. Take a little civic responsibility. Your community, is responsibility of everyone living there. You let that stuff happen, so don't cry about it, or hide behind your guns. They are nice to have, but you should feel a need of them 24/7, if you are being a responsible citizen. Gun ownership, isn't being a patriot, make sure nobody needs them in the first place. The police, the government, they won't know what needs done, or where, until the people tell them what they want done. You got people selling drugs in your neighborhood, call it in. You got a neighbor, always yelling fighting, hear screaming and crying, call it in. If you are mistaken, it's not a crime, just a misunderstanding. Most likely, it's no mistake, and you can reduce the crime in your area, and need to rely on your guns less.
11-08-2019 17:06
GasGuzzler
★★★★☆
(1326)
tmiddles wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
4 questions for you....

1. Do you want to be armed?
2. What kind of weapon do you want?
3. How many rounds do you want in each clip?
4. How fast would you like to be able to fire each round?


I'm giving you option 5. Call 911 and hide

Ah, reach for your phone instead of your gun. It will safe your life. So, which is more effective? Apple or Android?

tmiddles wrote:People itching to stand their ground need therapy more than they need a gun.

No one is itching to stand their ground. I live in a rural area where sheriff response time could easily be 10-15 minutes. That is a long time for a deadly version of hide and seek. I don't wish to ever play your game.


I think people screw me over because they don't want to see someone willing to put out the effort that they won't.~James~
11-08-2019 17:43
HarveyH55
★★★★☆
(1012)
Into the Night wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
https://www.massshootingtracker.org/data/all

Apparently, mass shootings are a lot more common than we are lead to believe. Officially, 4 or more victims, is considered a mass shooting. Was looking for weapon type, by incident, but have found that yet. This list was quite surprising though, 2662 mass shootings, since 2014, just in America. Think this a fairly accurate list too, they link to the news article(s) where the got their information. I remember several of the domestic shootings, that I hadn't know at the time, were classified as mass shootings. With just the minimal 4 victims, that's over 10,000 victims in less than 5 years. While scrolling through, on had a note, the shooter had a conceal carry permit. Hope the closed that loop-hole in the current process. The vast majority seem to be domestic violence related. Maybe they should put a greater focus on that for a while. Could be good for those being abused, since the violent on, probably loves his guns above all else, might be a little better behaved.

I'm not sure what can be done with all those deemed mental unfit to own guns. It's sort of a subjective thing. Treatment only deals with symptoms, doesn't cure the cause. Drugs don't always work, sometimes create more problems than they treat. Never really know, until they prescribe something, basically guess at the appropriate dosage, adjust as needed, see how it works out. Of course, it depends on the patient, actual take the medication, as directed, and letting the doctor know if they aren't working, or causing other problems. Patients aren't doctors, and unlikely to know if there is a problem to discuss. The only actual 'cures' I'm aware of, were E.C.T, and Frontal Lobotomy. I don't think they do lobotomies anymore, since it general turned the patient into a drooling zombie, in need of lifetime care. E.C.T. is still used, but scares the crap out of me, but apparently effective. It's not simply getting your brain zapped once, flop and twitch for 30-40 minutes, and you're done. It's sort of like chemo-therapy, they make you go through it a bunch times. I really hate getting shocked, but I don't freak over it though, it's just creepy. I work with electricity quite a bit, prefer low voltage/current, but have to do the shocky stuff occasionally. Doubt I'll get shocked to death, but some safety practices will still let you feel it. Anyway, E.C.T. takes months, and it's kind of rough. Not like it's entirely outpatient, or DIY. It messes up your brain pretty good, takes a while to get rebooted, and back on track. They have know idea what is going to get messed, and how long it's going to take the patient to be ready to return to work.

So you think moving the goalposts is a valid argument???


I'm not interested in argument/debate games, you still want that power and control, ain't happening.

I ran across that website, a learned a few things, felt it was worth sharing, to those interested in learning as well. It's good information for everyone, lot less biased than what's in the news. It supports gun ownership for home defense, since most mass shooting are at a private residence. Unfortunately, the shooter, and the victims all knew each other, in the majority of them. It's not some gang of thugs, busting through the door.

You've stated your opinion (case) clearly, and aren't willing to consider anything else. You have to, hold onto that power and control, no matter what. Anything else is time wasting game, I don't need to play. I'm not here to entertain you, when you get bored, and need a good fight.

There are many responsible gun owners, but there are also a whole lot people that aren't. There are way to many people that should be allowed near a gun, or any weapon for that matter. The laws we already have aren't being used, or aren't effective. Do you really believe that arming every man, woman, and child, and telling them good luck, you are on your own, if you want to live, is really the best way to go? Some of those people you handed a weapon, are going to do very bad things with it. The same things, that require more people to carry and own guns in the first place.

You are on a defensive stance, you need the power of you weapons, to remain in control. In your debate game, forcing your opponent to play defensively, is what guarantees your winning. Why don't you apply that to the gun violence problem as well. You hate being on the defensive in debate, but you are okay with hiding behind a gun? I don't like have to limp around on a quick-fix repair job, I prefer to actually fix the problem, and not have to worry about it again for a long time. Shooting your immediate threat, is a quick fix, there is still the problem, and more shooters. You are always going to be on the defensive, ready to quick-fix the same problem, over, and over, eventually to fail.

Active shooters like assault rifles for all the same reason you do. Comes down to who pulls the trigger first. Nobody knows there is a mass shooter in the crowd, until he pulls the trigger first. Most of the residential/domestic shootings, they know the shooter, they just don't know that it's happening, until the first shot is fired.

You aren't just on the defensive in protecting yourself, you are a trigger pull or two behind, tough way to win a game.
11-08-2019 18:09
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8697)
tmiddles wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
4 questions for you....

1. Do you want to be armed?
2. What kind of weapon do you want?
3. How many rounds do you want in each clip?
4. How fast would you like to be able to fire each round?


Keep in mind everything you decide will be legal will be in the hands of those attacking you. Criminals have almost exclusively guns that are legal to buy.

I'm giving you option 5. Call 911 and hide

People itching to stand their ground need therapy more than they need a gun.

No 911 service. Now what?


The Parrot Killer
11-08-2019 18:12
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8697)
HarveyH55 wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
A lot of one line, repetitive, regurgitation, which tend skip over anymore. It's you debate game, you play yourself.

Nah. You're just not willing to listen to the arguments I have made. You label them 'debate games' as a way to simply discard them. That's a fallacy, dude.
HarveyH55 wrote:
The only way you are going to lose your weapons, is if your are flagged as mentally unstable, from a closer examination. Perhaps you know you just squeezed by, you only to check a 'no' box, for mental illness, on some form. Paranoia is a mental illness...

Now you are justifying taking my guns away because of your psychoquackery.
HarveyH55 wrote:
I don't get to tell anybody what they can and can not do.

You are attempting to do just exactly that, liar.
HarveyH55 wrote:
I don't work for the government.

No, but you are perfectly willing to empower government thugs to do your dirty work for you.
HarveyH55 wrote:
I'm not doing to you, nor do I have the capacity to do so. You're getting hysterical, panicked, and paranoid, irrational, over a simple discussion. I don't know where your debate game crap starts or ends, doing my best to sort through. Mostly, I'm kind of thinking it's all crap.

You are doing it to me, by pushing laws that ban guns I may own or wish to purchase.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Active shooters like crowds of people... How does 10 or so other people, drawing weapons and firing, really help?

End of bad guy with gun.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Bullets to care who or what they hit. You hit your target, but only soft tissue, it can still pass through, and hit somebody else. When the shooting starts, it's chaos, people running, diving for cover. Those carry, aren't going know each other. How can you be sure they will be shooting the right person, and not just the first person holding a gun?

The situation is resolved. there is no more shooting. No more people need die.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Do you receive active shooter training, as part of getting a carry permit? Are there special signals you use, to let the other guardian citizen know you aren't the target? I'm a little skeptical about how effective people would be, who most shoot at paper, at a gun range would be. There are a lot of distractions, the target moves, and some chance people running for their lives, are bumping into you. But, in your case, who cares, they are only strangers, you don't know any of them. You could count the number of place you can take your assault rifle in public on one hand, that you don't need to keep it hidden, like your other dirty little secrets.

You are still trying to paint me as some crazed individual. I didn't shoot up Ohio or El Paso, jackass.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Mostly, you get to keep in your house, to defend your home, from the armies of armed criminals that live in your neighborhood. You basically got to sneak it out of the house, to go to the gun range, or some secluded place out in the woods. Wouldn't be better to do something about your local crime problem, rather than relying on guns to live your life safely? You have no control over it, so you need something to make feel like you have power over it. It's sort of like your debate game, the way to win is power and control, and nothing else matters.

YOU don't get to determine whether I can carry a gun or not. YOU don't get to determine what kind of gun I can carry or not.

The 2nd amendment is clear. The government has NO authority to infringe on any weapon in any way.


Perfect answers ITN.

Harvey, I'm coming to your house tonight and I'm bringing 3 friends. We're all heavily armed and we we don't give 2 shits about you or anyone in your home. I will be there in 5 seconds...(hypothetical)

4 questions for you....

1. Do you want to be armed?
2. What kind of weapon do you want?
3. How many rounds do you want in each clip?
4. How fast would you like to be able to fire each round?


Your guns won't do you much good, unless you get in. Should I always open the door to armed strangers?
...deleted remaining repetitive rant...


Do you really think they are going to knock and wait for you to open the door??

Gawd. You really ARE clueless, aren't you?


The Parrot Killer
11-08-2019 18:14
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8697)
HarveyH55 wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
https://www.massshootingtracker.org/data/all

Apparently, mass shootings are a lot more common than we are lead to believe. Officially, 4 or more victims, is considered a mass shooting. Was looking for weapon type, by incident, but have found that yet. This list was quite surprising though, 2662 mass shootings, since 2014, just in America. Think this a fairly accurate list too, they link to the news article(s) where the got their information. I remember several of the domestic shootings, that I hadn't know at the time, were classified as mass shootings. With just the minimal 4 victims, that's over 10,000 victims in less than 5 years. While scrolling through, on had a note, the shooter had a conceal carry permit. Hope the closed that loop-hole in the current process. The vast majority seem to be domestic violence related. Maybe they should put a greater focus on that for a while. Could be good for those being abused, since the violent on, probably loves his guns above all else, might be a little better behaved.

I'm not sure what can be done with all those deemed mental unfit to own guns. It's sort of a subjective thing. Treatment only deals with symptoms, doesn't cure the cause. Drugs don't always work, sometimes create more problems than they treat. Never really know, until they prescribe something, basically guess at the appropriate dosage, adjust as needed, see how it works out. Of course, it depends on the patient, actual take the medication, as directed, and letting the doctor know if they aren't working, or causing other problems. Patients aren't doctors, and unlikely to know if there is a problem to discuss. The only actual 'cures' I'm aware of, were E.C.T, and Frontal Lobotomy. I don't think they do lobotomies anymore, since it general turned the patient into a drooling zombie, in need of lifetime care. E.C.T. is still used, but scares the crap out of me, but apparently effective. It's not simply getting your brain zapped once, flop and twitch for 30-40 minutes, and you're done. It's sort of like chemo-therapy, they make you go through it a bunch times. I really hate getting shocked, but I don't freak over it though, it's just creepy. I work with electricity quite a bit, prefer low voltage/current, but have to do the shocky stuff occasionally. Doubt I'll get shocked to death, but some safety practices will still let you feel it. Anyway, E.C.T. takes months, and it's kind of rough. Not like it's entirely outpatient, or DIY. It messes up your brain pretty good, takes a while to get rebooted, and back on track. They have know idea what is going to get messed, and how long it's going to take the patient to be ready to return to work.

So you think moving the goalposts is a valid argument???


I'm not interested in argument/debate games, you still want that power and control, ain't happening.

I ran across that website, a learned a few things, felt it was worth sharing, to those interested in learning as well. It's good information for everyone, lot less biased than what's in the news. It supports gun ownership for home defense, since most mass shooting are at a private residence. Unfortunately, the shooter, and the victims all knew each other, in the majority of them. It's not some gang of thugs, busting through the door.

You've stated your opinion (case) clearly, and aren't willing to consider anything else. You have to, hold onto that power and control, no matter what. Anything else is time wasting game, I don't need to play. I'm not here to entertain you, when you get bored, and need a good fight.

There are many responsible gun owners, but there are also a whole lot people that aren't. There are way to many people that should be allowed near a gun, or any weapon for that matter. The laws we already have aren't being used, or aren't effective. Do you really believe that arming every man, woman, and child, and telling them good luck, you are on your own, if you want to live, is really the best way to go? Some of those people you handed a weapon, are going to do very bad things with it. The same things, that require more people to carry and own guns in the first place.

You are on a defensive stance, you need the power of you weapons, to remain in control. In your debate game, forcing your opponent to play defensively, is what guarantees your winning. Why don't you apply that to the gun violence problem as well. You hate being on the defensive in debate, but you are okay with hiding behind a gun? I don't like have to limp around on a quick-fix repair job, I prefer to actually fix the problem, and not have to worry about it again for a long time. Shooting your immediate threat, is a quick fix, there is still the problem, and more shooters. You are always going to be on the defensive, ready to quick-fix the same problem, over, and over, eventually to fail.

Active shooters like assault rifles for all the same reason you do. Comes down to who pulls the trigger first. Nobody knows there is a mass shooter in the crowd, until he pulls the trigger first. Most of the residential/domestic shootings, they know the shooter, they just don't know that it's happening, until the first shot is fired.

You aren't just on the defensive in protecting yourself, you are a trigger pull or two behind, tough way to win a game.


No, YOU don't have a trigger, remember? You don't like guns!

You think it's hopeless just because you can't pull the trigger frst???

Gawd. You ARE clueless.

Your answer shows that you will just lay down your life and property to these thugs, simply because you don't want to take any responsibility for protecting either one.


The Parrot Killer
Edited on 11-08-2019 18:17
11-08-2019 19:06
HarveyH55
★★★★☆
(1012)
Into the Night wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
https://www.massshootingtracker.org/data/all

Apparently, mass shootings are a lot more common than we are lead to believe. Officially, 4 or more victims, is considered a mass shooting. Was looking for weapon type, by incident, but have found that yet. This list was quite surprising though, 2662 mass shootings, since 2014, just in America. Think this a fairly accurate list too, they link to the news article(s) where the got their information. I remember several of the domestic shootings, that I hadn't know at the time, were classified as mass shootings. With just the minimal 4 victims, that's over 10,000 victims in less than 5 years. While scrolling through, on had a note, the shooter had a conceal carry permit. Hope the closed that loop-hole in the current process. The vast majority seem to be domestic violence related. Maybe they should put a greater focus on that for a while. Could be good for those being abused, since the violent on, probably loves his guns above all else, might be a little better behaved.

I'm not sure what can be done with all those deemed mental unfit to own guns. It's sort of a subjective thing. Treatment only deals with symptoms, doesn't cure the cause. Drugs don't always work, sometimes create more problems than they treat. Never really know, until they prescribe something, basically guess at the appropriate dosage, adjust as needed, see how it works out. Of course, it depends on the patient, actual take the medication, as directed, and letting the doctor know if they aren't working, or causing other problems. Patients aren't doctors, and unlikely to know if there is a problem to discuss. The only actual 'cures' I'm aware of, were E.C.T, and Frontal Lobotomy. I don't think they do lobotomies anymore, since it general turned the patient into a drooling zombie, in need of lifetime care. E.C.T. is still used, but scares the crap out of me, but apparently effective. It's not simply getting your brain zapped once, flop and twitch for 30-40 minutes, and you're done. It's sort of like chemo-therapy, they make you go through it a bunch times. I really hate getting shocked, but I don't freak over it though, it's just creepy. I work with electricity quite a bit, prefer low voltage/current, but have to do the shocky stuff occasionally. Doubt I'll get shocked to death, but some safety practices will still let you feel it. Anyway, E.C.T. takes months, and it's kind of rough. Not like it's entirely outpatient, or DIY. It messes up your brain pretty good, takes a while to get rebooted, and back on track. They have know idea what is going to get messed, and how long it's going to take the patient to be ready to return to work.

So you think moving the goalposts is a valid argument???


I'm not interested in argument/debate games, you still want that power and control, ain't happening.

I ran across that website, a learned a few things, felt it was worth sharing, to those interested in learning as well. It's good information for everyone, lot less biased than what's in the news. It supports gun ownership for home defense, since most mass shooting are at a private residence. Unfortunately, the shooter, and the victims all knew each other, in the majority of them. It's not some gang of thugs, busting through the door.

You've stated your opinion (case) clearly, and aren't willing to consider anything else. You have to, hold onto that power and control, no matter what. Anything else is time wasting game, I don't need to play. I'm not here to entertain you, when you get bored, and need a good fight.

There are many responsible gun owners, but there are also a whole lot people that aren't. There are way to many people that should be allowed near a gun, or any weapon for that matter. The laws we already have aren't being used, or aren't effective. Do you really believe that arming every man, woman, and child, and telling them good luck, you are on your own, if you want to live, is really the best way to go? Some of those people you handed a weapon, are going to do very bad things with it. The same things, that require more people to carry and own guns in the first place.

You are on a defensive stance, you need the power of you weapons, to remain in control. In your debate game, forcing your opponent to play defensively, is what guarantees your winning. Why don't you apply that to the gun violence problem as well. You hate being on the defensive in debate, but you are okay with hiding behind a gun? I don't like have to limp around on a quick-fix repair job, I prefer to actually fix the problem, and not have to worry about it again for a long time. Shooting your immediate threat, is a quick fix, there is still the problem, and more shooters. You are always going to be on the defensive, ready to quick-fix the same problem, over, and over, eventually to fail.

Active shooters like assault rifles for all the same reason you do. Comes down to who pulls the trigger first. Nobody knows there is a mass shooter in the crowd, until he pulls the trigger first. Most of the residential/domestic shootings, they know the shooter, they just don't know that it's happening, until the first shot is fired.

You aren't just on the defensive in protecting yourself, you are a trigger pull or two behind, tough way to win a game.


No, YOU don't have a trigger, remember? You don't like guns!

You think it's hopeless just because you can't pull the trigger frst???

Gawd. You ARE clueless.

Your answer shows that you will just lay down your life and property to these thugs, simply because you don't want to take any responsibility for protecting either one.


How do you figure I don't like guns? I don't have a need for any right now, never had a reason to point one at anybody. I have other hobbies, things I do for fun, a gun would just be sitting around some place, for somebody else to steal, or play with. There are many weapons available, I don't depend on a gun for protection. It's just one less thing for me to worry about, that I really don't need. I am getting older, maybe that will change, but my community is plagued with gangs of thugs yet, and don't expect that to change anytime soon, maybe not in my lifetime. It's a small city, we call the police when we see undesirable behavior, and it usually gets corrected quickly.

I'm neither clueless or obsessed. I'm still alive, no bullet holes, and nobody taking my property, must be protecting myself and property just fine, without a gun. I'm not that special, and yet I don't feel the same need or urgency to own high powered weapons. I have everything I need already, and has worked well for many decades. You do realize that there isn't only one way to solve any problem. Your solution, doesn't really fix any problems, just protects you, as an individual, from being a victim, no guarantee of success. You rely on a lot of luck, and being a split second quicker. That's TV, movie, video game thinking. You are always going to be hoping to be faster on the trigger. I'm hoping I'll never have to find out...
12-08-2019 01:36
tmiddles
★★★☆☆
(666)
GasGuzzler wrote:I live in a rural area where sheriff response time could easily be 10-15 minutes.


What if they show up in a Tank? Could you take on a Tank? Do you even have anti-Tank weaponry?

Now I know you're going to say Tanks are illegal.

Sorry to break it to you! CRIMINALS DON'T CARE WHAT'S ILLEGAL! Ergo they have Tanks.

So what now? Got an 88 cannon in the backyard? How long to load it.

Oh I forgot to mention. There are TWO tanks. and they aren't knocking on your door to let you know it's tank attack time!
12-08-2019 02:37
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(4328)
tmiddles wrote: Could you take on a Tank? Do you even have anti-Tank weaponry?

You are finally getting the point. The government is rendering him defenseless in violation of the 2nd Amendment. He can't even defend himself and his family against ONE single solitary tank. Such prohibitions against him being able to defend himself should be lifted.

tmiddles wrote: Sorry to break it to you! CRIMINALS DON'T CARE WHAT'S ILLEGAL!

Thank you. This is the anti-gun-control position. Carry on.

tmiddles wrote: Got an 88 cannon in the backyard? How long to load it.

Leave the loading to him; just help us lift the prohibition.

tmiddles wrote:Oh I forgot to mention. There are TWO tanks. and they aren't knocking on your door to let you know it's tank attack time!

I'm glad you brought this up. This is what a tyrranical government looks like as it's transitioning to full-Venezuela.

.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
12-08-2019 04:02
tmiddles
★★★☆☆
(666)
IBdaMann wrote:
Thank you. This is the anti-gun-control position. Carry on.
.


Tanks don't kill people, people kill people

The NRA isn't a bunch of crazy people, they just know crazy is fun!

12-08-2019 18:35
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8697)
HarveyH55 wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
https://www.massshootingtracker.org/data/all

Apparently, mass shootings are a lot more common than we are lead to believe. Officially, 4 or more victims, is considered a mass shooting. Was looking for weapon type, by incident, but have found that yet. This list was quite surprising though, 2662 mass shootings, since 2014, just in America. Think this a fairly accurate list too, they link to the news article(s) where the got their information. I remember several of the domestic shootings, that I hadn't know at the time, were classified as mass shootings. With just the minimal 4 victims, that's over 10,000 victims in less than 5 years. While scrolling through, on had a note, the shooter had a conceal carry permit. Hope the closed that loop-hole in the current process. The vast majority seem to be domestic violence related. Maybe they should put a greater focus on that for a while. Could be good for those being abused, since the violent on, probably loves his guns above all else, might be a little better behaved.

I'm not sure what can be done with all those deemed mental unfit to own guns. It's sort of a subjective thing. Treatment only deals with symptoms, doesn't cure the cause. Drugs don't always work, sometimes create more problems than they treat. Never really know, until they prescribe something, basically guess at the appropriate dosage, adjust as needed, see how it works out. Of course, it depends on the patient, actual take the medication, as directed, and letting the doctor know if they aren't working, or causing other problems. Patients aren't doctors, and unlikely to know if there is a problem to discuss. The only actual 'cures' I'm aware of, were E.C.T, and Frontal Lobotomy. I don't think they do lobotomies anymore, since it general turned the patient into a drooling zombie, in need of lifetime care. E.C.T. is still used, but scares the crap out of me, but apparently effective. It's not simply getting your brain zapped once, flop and twitch for 30-40 minutes, and you're done. It's sort of like chemo-therapy, they make you go through it a bunch times. I really hate getting shocked, but I don't freak over it though, it's just creepy. I work with electricity quite a bit, prefer low voltage/current, but have to do the shocky stuff occasionally. Doubt I'll get shocked to death, but some safety practices will still let you feel it. Anyway, E.C.T. takes months, and it's kind of rough. Not like it's entirely outpatient, or DIY. It messes up your brain pretty good, takes a while to get rebooted, and back on track. They have know idea what is going to get messed, and how long it's going to take the patient to be ready to return to work.

So you think moving the goalposts is a valid argument???


I'm not interested in argument/debate games, you still want that power and control, ain't happening.

I ran across that website, a learned a few things, felt it was worth sharing, to those interested in learning as well. It's good information for everyone, lot less biased than what's in the news. It supports gun ownership for home defense, since most mass shooting are at a private residence. Unfortunately, the shooter, and the victims all knew each other, in the majority of them. It's not some gang of thugs, busting through the door.

You've stated your opinion (case) clearly, and aren't willing to consider anything else. You have to, hold onto that power and control, no matter what. Anything else is time wasting game, I don't need to play. I'm not here to entertain you, when you get bored, and need a good fight.

There are many responsible gun owners, but there are also a whole lot people that aren't. There are way to many people that should be allowed near a gun, or any weapon for that matter. The laws we already have aren't being used, or aren't effective. Do you really believe that arming every man, woman, and child, and telling them good luck, you are on your own, if you want to live, is really the best way to go? Some of those people you handed a weapon, are going to do very bad things with it. The same things, that require more people to carry and own guns in the first place.

You are on a defensive stance, you need the power of you weapons, to remain in control. In your debate game, forcing your opponent to play defensively, is what guarantees your winning. Why don't you apply that to the gun violence problem as well. You hate being on the defensive in debate, but you are okay with hiding behind a gun? I don't like have to limp around on a quick-fix repair job, I prefer to actually fix the problem, and not have to worry about it again for a long time. Shooting your immediate threat, is a quick fix, there is still the problem, and more shooters. You are always going to be on the defensive, ready to quick-fix the same problem, over, and over, eventually to fail.

Active shooters like assault rifles for all the same reason you do. Comes down to who pulls the trigger first. Nobody knows there is a mass shooter in the crowd, until he pulls the trigger first. Most of the residential/domestic shootings, they know the shooter, they just don't know that it's happening, until the first shot is fired.

You aren't just on the defensive in protecting yourself, you are a trigger pull or two behind, tough way to win a game.


No, YOU don't have a trigger, remember? You don't like guns!

You think it's hopeless just because you can't pull the trigger frst???

Gawd. You ARE clueless.

Your answer shows that you will just lay down your life and property to these thugs, simply because you don't want to take any responsibility for protecting either one.


How do you figure I don't like guns?

You've said so. You say so again right here in this post.
HarveyH55 wrote:
I don't have a need for any right now,

Fine. No one is requiring you to own a gun. YOU don't get to choose if I want to own a gun. YOU don't get to choose which gun I choose to own.
HarveyH55 wrote:
never had a reason to point one at anybody.

Other people have.
HarveyH55 wrote:
I have other hobbies, things I do for fun,

So do I. Shooting is one of them.
HarveyH55 wrote:
a gun would just be sitting around some place,

No one is forcing you to buy a gun.
HarveyH55 wrote:
for somebody else to steal, or play with.

I keep my weapons secured. I don't leave them for some kid to find in the street.
HarveyH55 wrote:
There are many weapons available, I don't depend on a gun for protection.

Yes you do. You just don't depend on your OWN gun.
HarveyH55 wrote:
It's just one less thing for me to worry about, that I really don't need.

No one is forcing you to buy a gun.
HarveyH55 wrote:
I am getting older, maybe that will change, but my community is plagued with gangs of thugs yet, and don't expect that to change anytime soon, maybe not in my lifetime. It's a small city, we call the police when we see undesirable behavior, and it usually gets corrected quickly.

So you depend on the guns of the police. You still depend on guns.
HarveyH55 wrote:
I'm neither clueless or obsessed.

Yes you are.
HarveyH55 wrote:
I'm still alive, no bullet holes, and nobody taking my property,

Because the police have guns and are willing to use them if need be.
HarveyH55 wrote:
must be protecting myself and property just fine, without a gun.

You are depending on guns.
HarveyH55 wrote:
I'm not that special, and yet I don't feel the same need or urgency to own high powered weapons.

You are in the city. Not everyone lives in the city, dude. Not everyone trusts the police either.
HarveyH55 wrote:
I have everything I need already, and has worked well for many decades.

It's nice that you can trust your police force. But you DO depend on guns.
HarveyH55 wrote:
You do realize that there isn't only one way to solve any problem.

Never said they were.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Your solution, doesn't really fix any problems, just protects you, as an individual, from being a victim, no guarantee of success.

So you would rather depend on someone doing that for you. Clueless.
HarveyH55 wrote:
You rely on a lot of luck, and being a split second quicker.

To a certain extent. I also rely on my training and the reliability of my weapon.
HarveyH55 wrote:
That's TV, movie, video game thinking.

No, dude. Hollywood writers do not know what happens when someone is shot with a gun for real. Video games are computer generated challenges that have little to do with what weapon system is used or what UI the video game uses. Video games do not cause violence.
HarveyH55 wrote:
You are always going to be hoping to be faster on the trigger.

I am faster than most people in my gun club on drawing and firing accurately at my target.
HarveyH55 wrote:
I'm hoping I'll never have to find out...

It's actually part of competition shooting. It's a sporting challenge.


The Parrot Killer
12-08-2019 19:43
HarveyH55
★★★★☆
(1012)
Aside from the repetitious nonsense your game depends on, and has already been address, multiple times...

I pay property tax, part of that goes toward paying for police protection. Why wouldn't I use what I pay for? If I bought a gun, does that reduce my property tax?

I don't know why you continue to lie, I don't hate gun, no way I said such a thing. Your either hanging out with James a little too much, or you need to work on your reading comprehension skills.

You own guns, so you understand the responsibilities. I don't personally feel threatened to point of dedicating the time to owning, and maintaining a gun. It's a good drive to the nearest public range, and I wasn't much thrill with it, last time I was there. You go to the range, you probably has seen some of the same stupidity, people pull the magazine, point it anywhere, thinking it's unloaded and safe. Maybe it is, maybe they left one in the chamber. The high humidity here, adds considerably to the maintenance. I would need to make time to inspect, clean, oil it often, whether I use it or not, part of the responsibility. If you depend on it for protection, you need to keep it maintained, and practice often. I don't feel the threat or fear, no reason to own a gun for protection, my spare time better spent on other things. I don't hate guns, and I do understand responsible gun ownership. More to it, than just buying it, but got a hunch many gun owners never learned that. Owning a gun, doesn't mean you are responsible, or understand it. I just believe there needs to be a lot more to the purchase process, than payment and a receipt. People don't bother getting the education and training for responsible gun ownership. It's not for everyone, but it's cool for everyone to own them.

When your kid was read to start driving a car, did you just toss him the keys, tell him to have fun? Or, did you teach him a few things, before letting him get behind the wheel the first time? Even with an education, training, practice, still takes time to develop the skills to drive safely, and a few dents. Cars weren't intended to kill people, yet you need a license and insurance to drive. Guns were invented, specifically to kill, yet we require very little for the privilege.
13-08-2019 18:09
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8697)
HarveyH55 wrote:
Aside from the repetitious nonsense your game depends on, and has already been address, multiple times...

Inversion fallacy. I only respond to your posts. It is YOU making the repetitious arguments. You have not addressed a single thing. You have only repeated your intent to take away guns from responsible citizens (including me) because of what one Antifa clown did in Ohio. Go after the criminal, not people that had nothing to do with it!
HarveyH55 wrote:
I pay property tax, part of that goes toward paying for police protection. Why wouldn't I use what I pay for? If I bought a gun, does that reduce my property tax?

Irrelevant. Your self defense is YOUR responsibility, whether you pay any tax or not.
HarveyH55 wrote:
I don't know why you continue to lie,

Inversion fallacy. It is YOU that is lyng, both to me and to yourself.
HarveyH55 wrote:
I don't hate gun, no way I said such a thing.

Yes you have, liar. You fear them. You don't know them. You that which you do not understand.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Your either hanging out with James a little too much,

Liar. You already know otherwise.
HarveyH55 wrote:
or you need to work on your reading comprehension skills.

I comprehend your own statements far better than you do, I'm afraid. I know the logical conclusion of what you are arguing, even if you don't see it.
HarveyH55 wrote:
You own guns, so you understand the responsibilities.

Lie. I don't believe you understand ANY of the responsibilities, though I have described them to you. Argument of the stone fallacy.
HarveyH55 wrote:
I don't personally feel threatened to point of dedicating the time to owning,

That is your decision. I am not forcing you to buy a gun, dumbass.
HarveyH55 wrote:
and maintaining a gun.

They are simple machines. As machines, they need a certain amount of simple maintenance.
HarveyH55 wrote:
It's a good drive to the nearest public range, and I wasn't much thrill with it, last time I was there.

Lie. I already know you have never been to a public range from your post.
HarveyH55 wrote:
You go to the range, you probably has seen some of the same stupidity, people pull the magazine, point it anywhere, thinking it's unloaded and safe.
Maybe it is, maybe they left one in the chamber.

Another indication you have never been to a public range.
HarveyH55 wrote:
The high humidity here, adds considerably to the maintenance.

You have never maintained a gun. Humidity is not a factor and doesn't add to the maintenance.
HarveyH55 wrote:
I would need to make time to inspect, clean, oil it often, whether I use it or not, part of the responsibility.

Nope. You have never owned a gun I see. I doubt you have ever held one.

The gun is already oiled and clean. It takes a few minutes if you want to clean it. Inspecting it takes seconds.
HarveyH55 wrote:
If you depend on it for protection, you need to keep it maintained,

Certainly. It only takes a few minutes, and that is if you are using the gun a lot.
HarveyH55 wrote:
and practice often.

Not that often, unless you want to shoot competitively. Did you forget how to point our finger at something? That's really all it takes.
HarveyH55 wrote:
I don't feel the threat or fear,

Lie. You fear guns. You don't understand guns. You especially fear the AR15 design because it's somehow a magick gun that kills a lot of people.

Did you know that most mass murderers use a .22 pistol, rifle, or even a shotgun?

HarveyH55 wrote:
no reason to own a gun for protection,

Your choice. Your responsibility. Your consequences for that choice. You keep thinking I am trying to force you to own a gun. You are making shit up again.
HarveyH55 wrote:
my spare time better spent on other things.

False dichotomy fallacy. I spend most of my time on other things as well. No one ever said you have to spend all of your time with guns or none of it.
HarveyH55 wrote:
I don't hate guns,

Lie. You hate guns. You hate what you think they do. You hate innocent responsible citizens that happen to carry them because of what some guy in Ohio did. You are making a bald faced lie.
HarveyH55 wrote:
and I do understand responsible gun ownership.

Lie. You have never even held a gun. I am convinced of that. All you know about guns is what the liberal press have told you, and what Hollywierd have told you.
HarveyH55 wrote:
More to it, than just buying it, but got a hunch many gun owners never learned that. Owning a gun, doesn't mean you are responsible, or understand it.

Lie. If you own a gun, you are responsible for it. You are responsible for every bullet that comes out of it.
HarveyH55 wrote:
I just believe there needs to be a lot more to the purchase process, than payment and a receipt.

Why?
HarveyH55 wrote:
People don't bother getting the education and training for responsible gun ownership.

You don't need any more education or training than what a parent can teach a child, or what you can learn in a couple of hours in a class. It's no different than learning how to handle a knife safely.
HarveyH55 wrote:
It's not for everyone, but it's cool for everyone to own them.

Lie. You are lying to yourself now. You want to take guns away from me and other responsible citizens.
HarveyH55 wrote:
When your kid was ready to start driving a car, did you just toss him the keys, tell him to have fun?

* a car is a much more complex machine, with non obvious rules of operating it and maintaining it.
* handling a gun safely is no different than learning to handle a knife or a box of matches safely.
* would you do the same thing with a knife, or a box of matches?
HarveyH55 wrote:
Or, did you teach him a few things, before letting him get behind the wheel the first time?

I taught my son to drive. He is a good driver. I also taught my daughter. She is not so good, but at least she has never had an accident that was her fault.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Even with an education, training, practice, still takes time to develop the skills to drive safely, and a few dents.

WRONG. It takes just a few hours to learn how to handle a gun safely.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Cars weren't intended to kill people, yet you need a license and insurance to drive. Guns were invented, specifically to kill, yet we require very little for the privilege.

Your hatred of guns is showing again. Your illiteracy of guns is showing again.

Yes, guns are designed to kill. That is also not all they do. Guns are used to signal for help, to entertain, to remove threats of avalanche, to build bridges, to secure certain types of rigging, to drive nails, and many other things. I have already listed these.

Swords are designed to kill. Poison is designed to kill. Brass knuckles are designed to maim or kill. Traps are designed to imprison or kill.

If you are in a situation where the police aren't immediately available, or the police themselves are the thugs, then you may have to kill. If you hire the police to come save the day for you, you are simply hiring them to possibly kill.

Now you are showing disdain for your own self protection. You desire to punish me and over a hundred million other citizens of this country because of your fear of the gun, particularly the AR15 design, which you don't even understand.

If you come to take my guns, I will kill. If you hire some other schmuck to take my guns, I will kill. If you leave me alone, I will not have to kill you or anyone else.

I WILL protect my property, myself, and others, even you, from a criminal threat, though you're an ingrate that doesn't appreciate all the things guns do for you all the time, even though you don't see people doing them for you.

You have already stated you won't take any responsibility for yourself, your property, or anyone else. Fine. You don't need to. But don't attack those that have nothing to do with Ohio or El Paso. Those types of people are going to be there. They do care one whit about your proposed rules. The only way to stop them is good guys with guns. You can't just magickally wish it away.


The Parrot Killer
Edited on 13-08-2019 18:11
13-08-2019 19:08
GasGuzzler
★★★★☆
(1326)
Into the Night wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
Aside from the repetitious nonsense your game depends on, and has already been address, multiple times...

Inversion fallacy. I only respond to your posts. It is YOU making the repetitious arguments. You have not addressed a single thing. You have only repeated your intent to take away guns from responsible citizens (including me) because of what one Antifa clown did in Ohio. Go after the criminal, not people that had nothing to do with it!
HarveyH55 wrote:
I pay property tax, part of that goes toward paying for police protection. Why wouldn't I use what I pay for? If I bought a gun, does that reduce my property tax?

Irrelevant. Your self defense is YOUR responsibility, whether you pay any tax or not.
HarveyH55 wrote:
I don't know why you continue to lie,

Inversion fallacy. It is YOU that is lyng, both to me and to yourself.
HarveyH55 wrote:
I don't hate gun, no way I said such a thing.

Yes you have, liar. You fear them. You don't know them. You that which you do not understand.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Your either hanging out with James a little too much,

Liar. You already know otherwise.
HarveyH55 wrote:
or you need to work on your reading comprehension skills.

I comprehend your own statements far better than you do, I'm afraid. I know the logical conclusion of what you are arguing, even if you don't see it.
HarveyH55 wrote:
You own guns, so you understand the responsibilities.

Lie. I don't believe you understand ANY of the responsibilities, though I have described them to you. Argument of the stone fallacy.
HarveyH55 wrote:
I don't personally feel threatened to point of dedicating the time to owning,

That is your decision. I am not forcing you to buy a gun, dumbass.
HarveyH55 wrote:
and maintaining a gun.

They are simple machines. As machines, they need a certain amount of simple maintenance.
HarveyH55 wrote:
It's a good drive to the nearest public range, and I wasn't much thrill with it, last time I was there.

Lie. I already know you have never been to a public range from your post.
HarveyH55 wrote:
You go to the range, you probably has seen some of the same stupidity, people pull the magazine, point it anywhere, thinking it's unloaded and safe.
Maybe it is, maybe they left one in the chamber.

Another indication you have never been to a public range.
HarveyH55 wrote:
The high humidity here, adds considerably to the maintenance.

You have never maintained a gun. Humidity is not a factor and doesn't add to the maintenance.
HarveyH55 wrote:
I would need to make time to inspect, clean, oil it often, whether I use it or not, part of the responsibility.

Nope. You have never owned a gun I see. I doubt you have ever held one.

The gun is already oiled and clean. It takes a few minutes if you want to clean it. Inspecting it takes seconds.
HarveyH55 wrote:
If you depend on it for protection, you need to keep it maintained,

Certainly. It only takes a few minutes, and that is if you are using the gun a lot.
HarveyH55 wrote:
and practice often.

Not that often, unless you want to shoot competitively. Did you forget how to point our finger at something? That's really all it takes.
HarveyH55 wrote:
I don't feel the threat or fear,

Lie. You fear guns. You don't understand guns. You especially fear the AR15 design because it's somehow a magick gun that kills a lot of people.

Did you know that most mass murderers use a .22 pistol, rifle, or even a shotgun?

HarveyH55 wrote:
no reason to own a gun for protection,

Your choice. Your responsibility. Your consequences for that choice. You keep thinking I am trying to force you to own a gun. You are making shit up again.
HarveyH55 wrote:
my spare time better spent on other things.

False dichotomy fallacy. I spend most of my time on other things as well. No one ever said you have to spend all of your time with guns or none of it.
HarveyH55 wrote:
I don't hate guns,

Lie. You hate guns. You hate what you think they do. You hate innocent responsible citizens that happen to carry them because of what some guy in Ohio did. You are making a bald faced lie.
HarveyH55 wrote:
and I do understand responsible gun ownership.

Lie. You have never even held a gun. I am convinced of that. All you know about guns is what the liberal press have told you, and what Hollywierd have told you.
HarveyH55 wrote:
More to it, than just buying it, but got a hunch many gun owners never learned that. Owning a gun, doesn't mean you are responsible, or understand it.

Lie. If you own a gun, you are responsible for it. You are responsible for every bullet that comes out of it.
HarveyH55 wrote:
I just believe there needs to be a lot more to the purchase process, than payment and a receipt.

Why?
HarveyH55 wrote:
People don't bother getting the education and training for responsible gun ownership.

You don't need any more education or training than what a parent can teach a child, or what you can learn in a couple of hours in a class. It's no different than learning how to handle a knife safely.
HarveyH55 wrote:
It's not for everyone, but it's cool for everyone to own them.

Lie. You are lying to yourself now. You want to take guns away from me and other responsible citizens.
HarveyH55 wrote:
When your kid was ready to start driving a car, did you just toss him the keys, tell him to have fun?

* a car is a much more complex machine, with non obvious rules of operating it and maintaining it.
* handling a gun safely is no different than learning to handle a knife or a box of matches safely.
* would you do the same thing with a knife, or a box of matches?
HarveyH55 wrote:
Or, did you teach him a few things, before letting him get behind the wheel the first time?

I taught my son to drive. He is a good driver. I also taught my daughter. She is not so good, but at least she has never had an accident that was her fault.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Even with an education, training, practice, still takes time to develop the skills to drive safely, and a few dents.

WRONG. It takes just a few hours to learn how to handle a gun safely.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Cars weren't intended to kill people, yet you need a license and insurance to drive. Guns were invented, specifically to kill, yet we require very little for the privilege.

Your hatred of guns is showing again. Your illiteracy of guns is showing again.

Yes, guns are designed to kill. That is also not all they do. Guns are used to signal for help, to entertain, to remove threats of avalanche, to build bridges, to secure certain types of rigging, to drive nails, and many other things. I have already listed these.

Swords are designed to kill. Poison is designed to kill. Brass knuckles are designed to maim or kill. Traps are designed to imprison or kill.

If you are in a situation where the police aren't immediately available, or the police themselves are the thugs, then you may have to kill. If you hire the police to come save the day for you, you are simply hiring them to possibly kill.

Now you are showing disdain for your own self protection. You desire to punish me and over a hundred million other citizens of this country because of your fear of the gun, particularly the AR15 design, which you don't even understand.

If you come to take my guns, I will kill. If you hire some other schmuck to take my guns, I will kill. If you leave me alone, I will not have to kill you or anyone else.

I WILL protect my property, myself, and others, even you, from a criminal threat, though you're an ingrate that doesn't appreciate all the things guns do for you all the time, even though you don't see people doing them for you.

You have already stated you won't take any responsibility for yourself, your property, or anyone else. Fine. You don't need to. But don't attack those that have nothing to do with Ohio or El Paso. Those types of people are going to be there. They do care one whit about your proposed rules. The only way to stop them is good guys with guns. You can't just magickally wish it away.

Slam dunk ITN.

I will only add this...

Harvey is willing to call for police protection if needed. By his claim of tax payment, he has already purchased the guns that he would rely on for his protection... including ARs.

What is disgusting is the opinion that I shouldn't have the same choice of weapon for MY situation.

Again, I live rural, as millions do. If I call the police because of an active shooter on my land, I'm simply calling for backup. It is up to me and my boys to hold the fort until law enforcement arrives.

Why Harvey, do you think you have the right to limit my self defense capabilities?


I think people screw me over because they don't want to see someone willing to put out the effort that they won't.~James~
13-08-2019 20:28
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(4328)
GasGuzzler wrote:Why Harvey, do you think you have the right to limit my self defense capabilities?

Better question: Why, Harvey, would you ever require me and my family to be defenseless before an armed criminal with violent intent?


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
13-08-2019 20:33
HarveyH55
★★★★☆
(1012)
Unless you have an obvious mental illness, there should be nothing no fear of losing your guns. From the rabid response above, the continued push to turn discussion into debate, were ITN knows he holds all the power and control, suspect there might be a disqualifying issue there. Guess he went searching, didn't find anything to relieve him of his lie. Guess he decide to try a few more. I won't play the debate game.

Maybe I am crazy, thinking that we should have some system of weeding out the mentally unstable, before they shoot up a bunch of people, which seems to be the only indicator, a little late. That Ohio shooter only had 30 seconds, managed to kill 10, wound 17. Pretty much empty his first magazine.

So, both of you are convinced that you have an absolute need of high power weapons, 24/7... How many thugs have you actually killed over the years? I've never been shot at, maybe part of my lack of paranoia. Let me guess, not even one thug, yet, but you hope and dream for the chance someday.
13-08-2019 20:33
GasGuzzler
★★★★☆
(1326)
IBdaMann wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:Why Harvey, do you think you have the right to limit my self defense capabilities?

Better question: Why, Harvey, would you ever require me and my family to be defenseless before an armed criminal with violent intent?


To be fair, I don't think he's ever argued for the total ban of guns. He has only argued against the AR-15.

However, the ban of the AR would be the first step toward the total band a firearms. If he is the conservative he claims to be, he should be able to see this.


I think people screw me over because they don't want to see someone willing to put out the effort that they won't.~James~
13-08-2019 20:48
GasGuzzler
★★★★☆
(1326)
HarveyH55 wrote:
Unless you have an obvious mental illness, there should be nothing no fear of losing your guns. From the rabid response above, the continued push to turn discussion into debate, were ITN knows he holds all the power and control, suspect there might be a disqualifying issue there. Guess he went searching, didn't find anything to relieve him of his lie. Guess he decide to try a few more. I won't play the debate game.

Maybe I am crazy, thinking that we should have some system of weeding out the mentally unstable, before they shoot up a bunch of people, which seems to be the only indicator, a little late. That Ohio shooter only had 30 seconds, managed to kill 10, wound 17. Pretty much empty his first magazine.

So, both of you are convinced that you have an absolute need of high power weapons, 24/7... How many thugs have you actually killed over the years? I've never been shot at, maybe part of my lack of paranoia. Let me guess, not even one thug, yet, but you hope and dream for the chance someday.


I enjoy high-powered weapons. I hope like hell I never need them. However, if I ever see the innocent under fire I will have no problem killing to defend my family, my neighbor's, or even you.


I think people screw me over because they don't want to see someone willing to put out the effort that they won't.~James~
Edited on 13-08-2019 21:18
14-08-2019 03:37
HarveyH55
★★★★☆
(1012)
GasGuzzler wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
Unless you have an obvious mental illness, there should be nothing no fear of losing your guns. From the rabid response above, the continued push to turn discussion into debate, were ITN knows he holds all the power and control, suspect there might be a disqualifying issue there. Guess he went searching, didn't find anything to relieve him of his lie. Guess he decide to try a few more. I won't play the debate game.

Maybe I am crazy, thinking that we should have some system of weeding out the mentally unstable, before they shoot up a bunch of people, which seems to be the only indicator, a little late. That Ohio shooter only had 30 seconds, managed to kill 10, wound 17. Pretty much empty his first magazine.

So, both of you are convinced that you have an absolute need of high power weapons, 24/7... How many thugs have you actually killed over the years? I've never been shot at, maybe part of my lack of paranoia. Let me guess, not even one thug, yet, but you hope and dream for the chance someday.


I enjoy high-powered weapons. I hope like hell I never need them. However, if I ever see the innocent under fire I will have no problem killing to defend my family, my neighbor's, or even you.


That's a good, healthy attitude, much appreciated.

These public mass shootings are getting a lot of people fired up about gun control legislation, and not so focused on keeping the mental ill, away from the guns in the first place. A solution to reduce the mass shootings, would ease the push on gun control. I'm not sure what will work, but nobody is happy now, and I'm sure not everybody will be happy with anything that get's tried.

Lot of talk on the radio, about 'Red Flag Laws', which I think is going to turn out badly, unless there are consequences for those that falsely accuse. I don't think most people have the education, to determine if someone is mentally ill, or a danger. We already have laws to deal with threats, and domestic violence. We have laws against terrorism. which is actually what public mass shootings amount to. It's pretty much the same as the suicide bombers in other countries. These shooters don't intend to survive, most die on the scene, self-inflicted, or with a little help. I really don't understand suicide, been through many rough times, but I never doubted that it would get better, eventually. Life is short enough as it is, why get in a hurry to see what's next. No one knows if there is anything after, or if it's better. I don't see why killing a bunch of people would help much, for those who wish to end their own. Maybe, they should legalize it, make easy and convenient, peaceful.

What I do know, is that even responsible gun owners should see there is problem, and looking for a reasonable, acceptable solution to these public mass shooting. Each time they happen, it just gets millions of people fired up for some very strict gun legislation. The president, the legislators, and supreme court, all change. Eventually, the public outrage, and the wrong combination in high office, is going make some seriously unpleasant changes. I don't own any guns now, but knowing I have that option is good enough for now, situations change.

I'd be willing to wait on guns, and gun related purchases. Those that need it, and need it right now, might not be the most patient, responsible people to be purchasing. Slowing it down some, might help catch a mass shooter in the making. Or some sort of licensing scheme, once you past some tests and checks, no reason to keep having to go through the background checks for every purchase.
16-08-2019 16:50
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8697)
HarveyH55 wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
Unless you have an obvious mental illness, there should be nothing no fear of losing your guns. From the rabid response above, the continued push to turn discussion into debate, were ITN knows he holds all the power and control, suspect there might be a disqualifying issue there. Guess he went searching, didn't find anything to relieve him of his lie. Guess he decide to try a few more. I won't play the debate game.

Maybe I am crazy, thinking that we should have some system of weeding out the mentally unstable, before they shoot up a bunch of people, which seems to be the only indicator, a little late. That Ohio shooter only had 30 seconds, managed to kill 10, wound 17. Pretty much empty his first magazine.

So, both of you are convinced that you have an absolute need of high power weapons, 24/7... How many thugs have you actually killed over the years? I've never been shot at, maybe part of my lack of paranoia. Let me guess, not even one thug, yet, but you hope and dream for the chance someday.


I enjoy high-powered weapons. I hope like hell I never need them. However, if I ever see the innocent under fire I will have no problem killing to defend my family, my neighbor's, or even you.


That's a good, healthy attitude, much appreciated.

These public mass shootings are getting a lot of people fired up about gun control legislation, and not so focused on keeping the mental ill, away from the guns in the first place. A solution to reduce the mass shootings, would ease the push on gun control. I'm not sure what will work, but nobody is happy now, and I'm sure not everybody will be happy with anything that get's tried.

Lot of talk on the radio, about 'Red Flag Laws', which I think is going to turn out badly, unless there are consequences for those that falsely accuse. I don't think most people have the education, to determine if someone is mentally ill, or a danger. We already have laws to deal with threats, and domestic violence. We have laws against terrorism. which is actually what public mass shootings amount to. It's pretty much the same as the suicide bombers in other countries. These shooters don't intend to survive, most die on the scene, self-inflicted, or with a little help. I really don't understand suicide, been through many rough times, but I never doubted that it would get better, eventually. Life is short enough as it is, why get in a hurry to see what's next. No one knows if there is anything after, or if it's better. I don't see why killing a bunch of people would help much, for those who wish to end their own. Maybe, they should legalize it, make easy and convenient, peaceful.

What I do know, is that even responsible gun owners should see there is problem, and looking for a reasonable, acceptable solution to these public mass shooting. Each time they happen, it just gets millions of people fired up for some very strict gun legislation. The president, the legislators, and supreme court, all change. Eventually, the public outrage, and the wrong combination in high office, is going make some seriously unpleasant changes. I don't own any guns now, but knowing I have that option is good enough for now, situations change.

I'd be willing to wait on guns, and gun related purchases. Those that need it, and need it right now, might not be the most patient, responsible people to be purchasing. Slowing it down some, might help catch a mass shooter in the making. Or some sort of licensing scheme, once you past some tests and checks, no reason to keep having to go through the background checks for every purchase.


Neither the President, Congress, nor the Supreme Court has the authority to change the Constitution of the United States. No State has that authority by itself either. It MUST work cooperatively with the other States. They are bound by the same limitations of authority. They agreed to it when they each joined to the Union.

ANY attempt at infringing the right to bear arms is an illegal act. Arms include any accessories. A sword is quite useless without a hilt, for example. A gun can be used without sights, but putting sights on it allow the shooter to be more accurate. A scope is even better.

Yes, I mean ANY accessory, including bump stocks, recently limited illegally by executive order from President Trump. He does NOT have that authority.


The Parrot Killer
Edited on 16-08-2019 16:51
Page 2 of 2<12





Join the debate Recent Mass Shootings (since 2016):

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Does mass media convince people?1818-06-2019 05:53
Maine Becomes The Most Recent Blue State To Reject A Carbon Tax314-03-2019 03:34
Mass Sacrifice Of Children And Llamas In Ancient Peru Reflects Trauma Over Climate Change107-03-2019 18:28
It looks like sun spots decrease did cause the most recent little ice age326-02-2019 00:34
Climate change and possible mass migration on a grand scale.. so where is safe?3613-12-2017 00:27
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2019 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact